similar to: [LLVMdev] Legal matters using code etc from MS website

Hi Vikram, Hmmm, my first reply on your request apparently landed somewhere in hey stack on the big internet.... >Was there a specific piece of code someone is using from Microsoft? I >don't know if missed a message about this. Jeff Cohen implemented a win32 version of Signals.cpp by using a public available example published on MSDN. Please follow this thread:

Hi Folks Please review this link: http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.mspx#EKAA As I see it, no one should use code copied from Microsoft directly, unless you are explicitly sure it is for private or non-commercial use or a permission is specifically granted for the purpose. And for that matter, no one can be sure if you rewrite code, not to infringe patents - as they adhere to

Hi, This minor patch clarify matters in the CFEBuildInstrs.html file in my view. Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/

Hi, I get this error: --------------- configure: configuring in projects/Stacker configure: running /bin/sh '/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker/configure' --prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/ '--prefix=/C/LLVM/tools/' 'CPPFLAGS=-D__MINGW -DLLVM_ON_WIN32=1' --cache-file=/dev/null --srcdir=/C/projects/src/llvm-2/llvm/projects/Stacker configure: error: invalid variable

Yes, Chris you're right. It seems that my << operator for int64_t is missing in my '/opt/gcc.3.3/include/c++/3.3/bits/ostream.tcc' file. Which ordinary version of GCC are you working with and how do your definition of the << operator for int64_t look like? /Henrik > >Here is an excerpt from the config.log for LLVM: > >configure:19451: checking for int64_t

Uh... shouldn't a Win32 port use the Win32 API? On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 02:11:51 +0200 "Henrik Bach" <henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > Here is my first patches to the Win32 platform. > > They compile on the mingw platform. > > I haven't test them yet, but I thought it will best to put them in the save, > just in case... > >

============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/ =============================================================

Hi Jeff, _HEAPOK is unknown to mingw 1.0 (which is the official release). Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= Got Freedom? Software Freedom Day 2004 - 28th of August http://www.softwarefreedomday.org/

Hi, Today I've succeded in compiling the llvm-tools, llvm-gcc and stacker frontend and in installing it. Uptill now I've followed the steps given in: http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/docs/CFEBuildInstrs.html with modifications for the mingw platform. I'll return with step-by-step instructions how to do it on this platform. Cheers Henrik :)

Hi Here is my first patches to the Win32 platform. They compile on the mingw platform. I haven't test them yet, but I thought it will best to put them in the save, just in case... /Henrik _________________________________________________________________ F� alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk/ -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and

Here is an excerpt from the config.log: configure:19451: checking for int64_t configure:19476: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5 configure:19479: $? = 0 configure:19482: test -s conftest.o configure:19485: $? = 0 configure:19496: result: yes configure:19511: checking for uint64_t configure:19536: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5 configure:19539: $? = 0 configure:19542: test -s conftest.o

Hi OG, I think it first of all would be nice, if we could supplement this group with a discussion list on this topic. The reason for this isn't to ad more bureacracy, but to present public ideas and visions to a broader forum and I belive in that the more elaboration within a broader forum the better the ideas will get and the more people will get committed to start and finish the task.

Sorry, I forgot to give all you guys my credit, too. Without your help - especially from Jeff, Morten, Reid and Chris, to name a few, this wouldn't have succeded. Just for fun, I ran from a windows command prompt the fibinacci.exe with the argument of 10 and it returned 55. All in all, something lives. Great! :) >From: "Henrik Bach" Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 23:26:02 +0100

Well Chris, then I've to ask the guys who really have the hands into the guts of the VC++ code: On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Henrik Bach wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I'm reading release notes for the fifth public release of LLVM and came > across this line: > > "The LLVM source code is now compatible with Microsoft Visual C++." > > which is almost true, if

Hi >From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> >Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:43:27 -0500 (CDT) >Ah, suddenly everything makes sense. If you're interested in LLVM on the >windows platform, *please* get CVS. Last night I've got the latest version of LLVM from CVS and now porting LLVM to Interix from this version on. I got this error: --------------------- gmake[1]:

Well, Henrik has a point. As of now, the only thing LLVM is good for when built with VS is the JIT engine, and then only if you're willing to write your own front end--or be satisfied computing fibonacci numbers :) That doesn't make it useless, of course, as Morten will testify, but the market for this level of functionality can't be big. I do plan on creating projects to build llc

Hi Vikram, Hmmm, my first reply on your request apparently landed somewhere in hey stack on the big internet.... >Was there a specific piece of code someone is using from Microsoft? I >don't know if missed a message about this. Jeff Cohen implemented a win32 version of Signals.cpp by using a public available example published on MSDN. Please follow this thread:

Hi again Does cygwin support shared libraries. And if not, how did you port llvm on this issue? /Henrik >From: "Henrik Bach" <henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com> >Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:41:53 +0200 > >Hi, > >I get this error: >------------------ >ToolRunner.cpp:396: error: `SHLIBEXT' undeclared (first use this function) >ToolRunner.cpp:396:

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Henrik Bach wrote: > This tweak seems to work. > > As far as I can see, correct me if I'm wrong, it is the compiler, that can't > figure out which std::basic_ostream to use. Why? What I'm saying is that it appears that your implementation of operator<< is not functional or is missing. You said that you are using GCC on internix. Is it possible

Hi Reid, Looking closer at the build process, I find that Path.cpp doesn't get compiled, even if it is a newer version than its *.o file. That's probaly the reason the error still exists. I've zipped and attached the trace after the point the new Path.cpp was updated by cvs. It clearly shows that it newer gets compiled and now shows that it is the dependencies in the makefile